Appeal and connected applications dismissed for default due to non-appearance of the appellant and lack of accommodation sought.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
18.05.2022
Court No.32 rpan/ 31
FA 148 of 1996
IA No.: CAN 1 of 1997 (Old No.: CAN 6891 of 1997) [Not found] + IA No.: CAN 2 of 1997 (Old No.: CAN 7705 of 1997) [Not found] + IA No.: CAN 7 of 2017 (Old No.: CAN 1828 of 2017) [Not found] + IA No.: CAN 8 of 2017 (Old No.: CAN 1849 of 2017) [Not found]
Esahaque Ali Khan – Versus – Mammu Khan & Others
No one appears on behalf of the appellant and no accommodation has been sought for. In view thereof, the present appeal and the connected applications are dismissed for default.
(Rai Chattopadhyay, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
Esahaque Ali Khan
Mammu Khan
Rai Chattopadhyay
Tapabrata Chakraborty
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
